Public Prayer and the ACLU

[beakerxf]

In this thread jenkinsfan stated:

I agree you shouldn’t have to join a private club to drink. Nor should a person have to join a private school to pray publicly. These kinds of gross intolerances must be stopped before we both consume ourselves with the kind of preaching you most despise.

This sparked a hijack, so I thought I’d start a separate thread. I pondered posting this in the other ACLU thread, but that seems to be a rather broad discussion and this thread will center on a specific aspect of the ACLU.
flymaster responded:

I pondered posting this in the other ACLU thread, but that seems to be a rather broad discussion and this thread will center on a specific aspect of the ACLU.

jenkinsfan stated:

Sir(?), I must diagree with you. It has been suggested by several in the ACLU that no open display of religion should be allowed. I’m sure I could dig up links on line which support my quote, but you can do it for yourself since I believe there has been enough written about the ACLU’s position on school prayer.

flymaster:

Actually, no, there have not. I direct your attention to the ACLU (and many other religious/non religious groups’) statement on relgion, found here: http://www.aclu.org/issues/religion/relig7.html

Some choice quotes:

quote:

Students have the right to distribute religious literature to their schoolmates, subject to those reasonable time, place, and manner or other constitutionally- acceptable restrictions imposed on the distribution of all non-school literature. Thus, a school may confine distribution of all literature to a particular table at particular times. It may not single out religious literature for burdensome regulation.

quote:

Students have the right to pray individually or in groups or to discuss their religious views with their peers so long as they are not disruptive. Because the Establishment Clause does not apply to purely private speech, students enjoy the right to read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, pray before tests, and discuss religion with other willing student listeners. In the classroom students have the right to pray quietly except when required to be actively engaged in school activities (e.g., students may not decide to pray just as a teacher calls on them). In informal settings, such as the cafeteria or in the halls, students may pray either audibly or silently, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other speech in these locations. However, the right to engage in voluntary prayer does not include, for example, the right to have a captive audience listen or to compel other students to participate.

quote:

Student religious clubs in secondary schools must be permitted to meet and to have equal access to campus media to announce their meetings, if a school receives federal funds and permits any student non-curricular club to meet during non-instructional time.

Certainly doesn’t sound to me as though the ACLU beleives “that no open display of religion should be allowed.”

jenkinsfan:

May I direct your attention to the recent issue of public prayer at high school football games? It was student led.

I then posted a quote from an ACLU representative that was in support of an incidence of public prayer at a football game

An ACLU official who actually supported an incidence of school prayer. Martin Mayne, president of the Houston chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said:

quote:

``That is exactly the kind of freedom we’re fighting for. The only place we have a concern is if the groups are going to try to get an official place in the program, or use the public address systems.’’

---

jenkinsfan:

It is common knowledge that the ACLU opposed prayer at public football games, and Flymaster posted the quote that supports this. Go back and read what has been written.

I did go back and re-read the quote and I still disagree. My quote refers to an incidence where students used equipment from a local radio station to broadcast prayer. It was student-led, it was public, it was at a football game, and the ACLU supported it. This appears to conflict with you belief that the ACLU is opposed to all public prayer at football games.

From everything I have ever read, the ACLU opposes football prayers that are “official”. If the school sets aside time so the students can “spontaneously” lead a prayer. It’s still being said in an official capacity.

I have seen nothing from the ACLU that indicates that the it opposes individuals standing at a football game on their own and praying, and quite frankly doubt they would have a leg to stand on in court if they did.

My whole debate with you is that you are accusing the ACLU of being against prayer in any capacity. I believe they are not against prayer at all, only when it impedes on the religious freedom of others.

[jenkinsfan]

*Originally posted by beakerxf *

I did go back and re-read the quote and I still disagree. My quote refers to an incidence where students used equipment from a local radio station to broadcast prayer. It was student-led, it was public, it was at a football game, and the ACLU supported it. This appears to conflict with you belief that the ACLU is opposed to all public prayer at football games.

I was speaking of a recent case in Texas (I believe) where a girl prayed before a public school football game and the ACLU did not support her right to do so.

From everything I have ever read, the ACLU opposes football prayers that are “official”. If the school sets aside time so the students can “spontaneously” lead a prayer. It’s still being said in an official capacity.

I never heard one of the teachers demand the girl to pray. No one was reprimanded for ignoring the prayer. Not one student was forced to participate. The school counsel never said, “We are going to make this prayer the official motto of our school.” There wasn’t any prayer enforcement agents secretly taking notes of those who were chatting during prayer. No fines. No arrests. No nothing-besides one girl praying and those listening who chose to do so.

I have seen nothing from the ACLU that indicates that the it opposes individuals standing at a football game on their own and praying, and quite frankly doubt they would have a leg to stand on in court if they did.

Well, in this case they did.

My whole debate with you is that you are accusing the ACLU of being against prayer in any capacity. I believe they are not against prayer at all, only when it impedes on the religious freedom of others.

And I am opposed to religion that impedes on the rights of others as well. I do not believe the ACLU is against prayer in all capacities. Only those who pray openly in school.

[Czarcasm]

On one side, we see cites with names, dates and exact quotes concerning specific situations. On the other side, we have a vague reference about a case in Texas(the poster “believes”) with no specifics we can look into.

Got anything a little more substancial, jenkinsfan?

[David_B]

jenkinsfan had said:

It has been suggested by several in the ACLU that no open display of religion should be allowed. I’m sure I could dig up links on line which support my quote, but you can do it for yourself since I believe there has been enough written about the ACLU’s position on school prayer.

I’d like to see you “dig up links” for this.

Yes, I know, you’ve brought up the football game case, which has so many problems on its own that you’re dead in the water there. But that’s not what you said, anyway. You said, “It has been suggested by several in the ACLU that no open display of religion be allowed.” (Emphasis mine.) So I want to see you back up that claim. Or admit you were lying.

[Kimstu]

jenkinsfan replied to beakerxf: *I was speaking of a recent case in Texas (I believe) where a girl prayed before a public school football game and the ACLU did not support her right to do so.

From everything I have ever read, the ACLU opposes football prayers that are “official”. If the school sets aside time so the students can “spontaneously” lead a prayer. It’s still being said in an official capacity.

I never heard one of the teachers demand the girl to pray. No one was reprimanded for ignoring the prayer. Not one student was forced to participate. The school counsel never said, “We are going to make this prayer the official motto of our school.” There wasn’t any prayer enforcement agents secretly taking notes of those who were chatting during prayer. No fines. No arrests. No nothing-besides one girl praying and those listening who chose to do so.

I have seen nothing from the ACLU that indicates that the it opposes individuals standing at a football game on their own and praying, and quite frankly doubt they would have a leg to stand on in court if they did.

Well, in this case they did.*

Since jenkinsfan hasn’t undertaken to provide any backup for his statements other than his own vague recollections, allow me to fill in a few gaps. I think that the case he is probably talking about is the March 2000 SCOTUS hearing on a Texas school district’s policy of student-led prayer at football games. Here are the facts as given in that press release:

• The lawsuit, led by two Texas families (one Catholic and one Mormon) alleges that “the school district’s policy of allowing students to lead prayers at home football games violated the First Amendment by creating a ‘pervasive religious atmosphere.’”

• The school district in question had originally had a chaplain lead an official prayer, but changed the policy to a voluntary student “invocation” and had the students vote by secret ballot to choose a prayer leader.

• “In its legal brief, the ACLU said that allowing students to choose a prayer leader by secret ballot does not change the fact that the prayer is a school-sponsored activity and that, in any case, the Constitution exists precisely to protect those with minority views against the tyranny of the majority. […] Ruling on the case in 1999, a federal appeals court agreed, saying that official prayers and other ‘solemnizing ceremonies’ before football games violated the Constitutional guarantee of religious liberty for all.”

If this is the case that jenkinsfan is describing as “one girl praying and those listening who chose to do so,” he has seriously misrepresented its facts. What this policy is about is having an official school-sponsored prayer taking place as a scheduled part of a school-sponsored event, i.e., the football game. It is irrelevant whether the teachers direct the students to pray or whether the students choose their own prayer leader, and it is irrelevant that students are not forced to join the prayer and not reprimanded or fined or arrested for failing to join in it. The issue here is that a religious activity such as prayer, no matter who’s participating in it, may not be a formal part of an event sponsored by the state.

So jenkinsfan, your claim that the ACLU is “against those who pray openly in school” is simply wrong. As cites from other posters have shown you, the ACLU entirely supports the right of individuals to pray in school and at school-affiliated activities, whether secretly, openly, alone, or in groups (as long as it’s not interfering with the rights of other individuals or the legitimate activities of the school—no interrupting halfway through Latin class with a fifteen-minute public prayer session, for example). What the ACLU is against is a school’s or school district’s official sponsorship of any prayer or other religious activity. If you’re going to repeat the claim that the ACLU opposes non-school-sponsored prayer, show us some better evidence. Your argument so far is completely invalid.

[Stoid]

I can’t easily recall another instance where one person’s bogus assertions were so thoroughly and irrefutably trashed.

Nicely done, folks.

stoid

[jenkinsfan]

From this site, ACLU I took this.

A school prayer amendment would allow government officials in the course of their work to make decisions that favor a particular faith. While prayers would not be organized by school employees, the amendment would allow administrators to impose their religious beliefs by permitting students to hold prayers at mandatory school events. It would also allow public funds to be used by religious institutions.

Popycock! Permitting someone to pray is not the same as imposing someone to pray! If an Islam wanted to say a prayer they would be allowed to regardless of what the teacher’s faith is.

Give me a few minutes to search more and you’ll get more.

[jenkinsfan]

Correction: I believe the link is ACLU

[jenkinsfan]

Perhaps more important than what the ACLU says is the actual Constitution which says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

Allowing students to pray publicly at school events is not respecting religion, it’s respecting the right of the student to be religious! Need I remind you that Congress is not to prohibit the free exercise thereof? Do you think telling students they cannot pray prohibits the free exercise? I would certainly say so.

[hansel]

*Originally posted by jenkinsfan *
Allowing students to pray publicly at school events is not respecting religion, it’s respecting the right of the student to be religious!

I’m not sure whether or not it’s deliberate, but you’re repeatedly missing the point.

Students may pray at football games, whether they’re Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. They may pray in school, and even in class, providing they’re not disturbing the class. They may gather as a group before a football game and say a prayer, or before class each day, or at halftime. They may pray silently, or aloud, or witness to friends and strangers providing they’re not violating basic rules of conduct that apply to any form of proselytizing (religious, political, or otherwise) in the school.

The school may not organize prayer events, and doing so under the guise of ‘student-led-and-elected’ events is an evasion that failed. It’s this point upon which the ACLU is standing, and not the former.

You’re imagining malevolence and persecution, and blaming a party who doesn’t intend that, has never supported that, and has come out against that.

---

Here’s an interesting test case for the schools, both for the reaction of the ACLU and of the parents, students, and other supporters of school-sanctioned prayer: have a prayer event prior to a football game, and select a member of each denomination represented in the school to lead/offer a one-minute prayer(Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Janist, Bhuddist, whatever, in addition to the dominant Christian sect). How would you feel about that, Jenkinsfan?

[Kimstu]

jenkinsfan: *Allowing students to pray publicly at school events is not respecting religion, it’s respecting the right of the student to be religious! *

No, jenkinsfan. If a public school sets aside a part of an official school event specifically for prayer, that is indeed an imposition of religious belief by the state.

Now, just to make sure we’re on the same page, I’m not talking about a situation like “free period” when students all happen to be assembled together and can do whatever they like. Some students are tossing paper airplanes, some students are working on their homework, some students are rehearsing for the talent show, etc.; as long as there are no silence requirements, then students can get up and pray publicly too. It would indeed be a violation of their rights to forbid them to do so in such circumstances, and you will not find an example of the ACLU advocating that it should be forbidden. Freedom of religious expression is very important to the ACLU. Similarly, at a football game when everybody is cheering or screaming “Get the quarterback!” or “Kill the ref!”, it is entirely acceptable for a group of people to be cheering in a prayerful fashion, though I don’t quite see how that would work… In short, events in which there is free and varied participation of lots of different types by different people can certainly include public prayer.

But in a situation such as an official programmed event where different people get scheduled turns at the microphone to contribute specific items of the program and everybody in the audience is supposed to be respectfully silent for all of them, it is not appropriate to have one of the specific items be prayer in any form. It doesn’t matter if a student is the one saying the prayer. The fact that the school is providing a chunk of scheduled time and the use of its microphone and the sponsorship of the official format of its event, specifically for the public recitation of a prayer, counts as government sponsorship of religion, and that ain’t constitutional. See the difference?

Now if you want to advocate for some sort of “open mike” portion of school-sponsored events where any student is free to contribute any public participation he or she wants, then it would indeed be wrong to exclude prayer as one of the forms of public contribution by students. But it would be equally wrong to exclude any other form of speech, including, say, an atheist excoriation of “religious zombies” or a comic monologue on the “Seven Last Farts of Christ.” (Which doesn’t even scratch the surface of the appalling things that I’m sure high school students would be able to come up with, which is why I think “open mike” at school events would be a really lousy idea!)

If you’re going to allow individuals to contribute whatever they want to a public assembly, you have to take what you get. If you’re going to restrict the event’s activities on the basis of content, you may not determine that one of those activities is going to be a prayer. Doesn’t matter who’s doing the praying or whether or not a teacher made them do it or encouraged them to do it. You can’t put public prayer or other religious activity into the official format of any state-sponsored activity. That’s not because the ACLU is against religious beliefs or practices, it’s because they’re against the imposition of religious beliefs or practices by the state.

[Flymaster]

Wow guys. Great job. I’ve never had a thread opened because of something I said before Anyway, it seems like you’re doing a thoroughly great job of tearing Jenkinsfan’s arguments to shreds, so I’ll leave you be.

As an aside, the OP’s quote of me saying “I pondered posting this in the other ACLU thread, but that seems to be a rather broad discussion and this thread will center on a specific aspect of the ACLU.” isn’t what I said. That was just a miscut and paste. What I actually said was along the lines of “Contact your local ACLU if you have been prevented from praying, or, if you haven’t, then stop lying about it” (Content edited from original Pit language.)

[beakerxf]

Yes, sorry about that. I pre-viewed three times before posting, but somehow overlooked that I had inserted my comments into your quote.

[Opus1]

People, people, people! When are you going to learn? Look at jenkinsfan’s other thread about “Does everyone have faith in something?” and you’ll see that he doesn’t need evidence to back up his bogus assertions! He has faith! What good is evidence in the face of such overwhelming faith?

jenkinsfan:

If an Islam wanted to say a prayer they would be allowed to regardless of what the teacher’s faith is.

Islam is of course the name of the religion; Muslim is what one would call a practitioner of the religion. You’re statement is parallel to: “If a Christianity wanted to say a prayer…”

Of course, I’m not surprised in the slightest that a fundamentalist Christian doesn’t even know how to use proper terminology wrt another religion. For some reason, faith and ignorance seem to go hand in hand.

[David_B]

Stoidela said:

I can’t easily recall another instance where one person’s bogus assertions were so thoroughly and irrefutably trashed.

Probably the last time jenkinsfan popped in here…

[friedo]

*Originally posted by Stoidela *
I can’t easily recall another instance where one person’s bogus assertions were so thoroughly and irrefutably trashed.

Oh, I can certainly recall a time or two.

[The_Ryan]

“This is Valhalla High School. In ten minutes, there will be a moment of spontaneous prayer for our football team. Mind you, you are not compelled to pray, but if you do not, you will be a smelly git. Thank you.” (principal Mike Powell)

[The_Ryan]

The above is what my friend has to say about this. Here’s what I have to say:

*Originally posted by jenkinsfan *

A school prayer amendment would allow government officials in the course of their work to make decisions that favor a particular faith. While prayers would not be organized by school employees, the amendment would allow administrators to impose their religious beliefs by permitting students to hold prayers at mandatory school events. It would also allow public funds to be used by religious institutions.

Popycock! Permitting someone to pray is not the same as imposing someone to pray! If an Islam wanted to say a prayer they would be allowed to regardless of what the teacher’s faith is.

Besides the previously mentioned misuse of the word “Islam”, I don’t understand what “imposing someone to pray” means. You mean no one is being forced to pray? Well, yes, that’s true. What does that have to do with anything?

Give me a few minutes to search more and you’ll get more.

It’s been over four hundred (a number I think most would agree is slightly more than “few”) minutes since you posted that, and we have seen no further evidence regarding the ACLU’s position.

Do you think telling students they cannot pray prohibits the free exercise? I would certainly say so.

Of course. Now if you can provide proof that the ACLU has told students that they can’t pray, then you’d haved a point.

Besides which, all of this was in response to your claim that one must join a private school in order to pray. Even if you could establish that the ACLU wishes this to be the case (which I seriously doubt), that doesn’t change the fact that your claim is false.

[PowerpuffKue]

This is a clear case of personal responsibility.

If any person want to pray, they need to take personal responsibility and find the proper time to do it. Otherwise I’ll talk to my friend the whole class and claim they’re my god and I’m their god, and this is how we pray. If I have 2 friends, I’ll claim its polythiestic.

It’s so hard for people to find their own time to pray, they have to have a special time taken away from educational learning or an extra curricular activitiy for themselves. And these are usually the people who say same-sex marriage is a “special right.” Sorta hypocritical isn’t it?

[blastfurnace]

(so you know, these qoutes are located here: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=48786):

originally posted by jenkinsfan
I’m actually interested in discussing this further, but I’m going to apologize to, Freyr for hijacking his thread.

originally posted by blastfurnace
My taxes helped pay for that PA. I AM NOT a Christian, why should I be obligated to pay for YOUR PRAYER?)
originally posted by jenkinsfan
Um, well, let me welcome you to the club. My money goes to pay for the science teacher’s salary that teaches evolution, it goes to pay for certain safe sex programs that I oppose, and sometimes it is used by the state to fund abortions that I don’t agree with.

You, of course, have options here. There are many private schools that are more closely aligned with your faith tradition. Evolution is not a faith based school of thought while Creationism is. Sex education is about education. Why fear that?
One role of Public schools is too try to accomodate a wide segment of society, all faiths and beliefs. As I’m sure you are aware, this is challenging to say the least. My opposition stems from a public school event sanctioning one form of faith over another…more specifically sanctioning ANY faith. Including mine. I’m curious as to why you feel a public school should engage in prayer at a football game. Please take into consideration all of the people who may not be Christian, or even your particular denomination, that will take offense. If your child’s school insisted on calling up the nether demons from hell to help your team win, would you find this offensive as a christian? Wouldn’t it be better to let a football game be a game where ALL people can gather comfortably? Remember, nobody has ever said you can’t pray publicly. Only that you can’t use tax-payer funded equipment/utilities to do it.

originally posted by blastfurnace
Take your ******* religion and practice it all you want, but GET IT THE **** OUT OF MY FACE! There A LOT of us out there who WILL NOT STAND for your dogma anymore

originally posted by jenkinsfan
When did you ever stand for it? By that statement you admit to me that you have all the freedom you want to disagree with me and not participate in Christianity. It’s becoming obvious to me now how afraid of Christians you are, how abused by them you have been, and how communistic we’ve become. Maybe someday we’ll give you the right to openly disagree with us.

That would be neat-o. What I was saying to you was a pit post. We vent there. What frustrates me is this need of christians to force feed their beliefs on other people/societies/cultures. Why so needy? (I’m not being sarcastic…) Doesn’t your “god” give you everything you need to be happy? Why are you so against a person going to a simple high school football game without having to listen to your PARTICULAR PRAYER over the loudspeaker? This is a hijack, but I’m honestly curious about your perspective.

Jesus, I’m told, loves you.